Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
David Boyns
California State University, Northridge
The zombie film has become an important component of contemporary popular culture. The
sociological nature of the themes addressed by these films reflect prominent social concerns, and
lend themselves to sociological analysis as texts themselves. This article examines the zombie film
genre, its history, predominant themes, and its illustration of sociological dynamics related to
identity, collective behavior, disease, contagion, and the privileges that come from social
inequality. Particular attention is placed on what the zombie films, themselves, can tell us about
society and how they illustrate sociological principles. First, we examine the origins and history of
zombie cinema. Next, we move to a discussion of the central narrative devices around which
zombie films are organized. In particular, we focus on two narratives in zombie films: those that
emphasize zombie possession; and those that focus on the sociological risks of zombie pandemics.
The discussion then moves to an analysis of zombies as selves, and how zombie films express
cultural anxieties about selfhood, loss of autonomy, and threats of de-individualization. We then
explore the roles of power and privilege in the social epidemiology of zombification, paying
particular attention to how those who succumb to zombiedom illustrate the sociological
dynamics of health disparities in the real world. Finally, the sociology of infectious disease is used
to address how zombiedom correlates with real disease outbreaks, what we know about the social
aspects of infectious disease transmission, and the sociology of pandemics.
Keywords: zombies; sociology of film; identity; collective behavior; disease; privilege; inequal-
ity; power
INTRODUCTION
The 21st centuryzombie film has become a mainstay of American cinema. With its
roots in classic films like White Zombie (1932) and independent cinema like George
Romeros Night of the Living Dead (1968), the 21st centuryzombie film has become a
prominent motif in popular American movies and provides a fertile series of texts for
sociological investigation. Zombie films have been nominally known as cult cinema, but
*Direct all correspondence to Robert Wonser, Los Angeles Valley College, Sociology, 5800 Fulton Ave-
nue, Valley Glen, CA 91401; e-mail: wonserrg@lavc.edu
recent blockbuster zombie filmslike Resident Evil (2002) and its offspring; the
acclaimed film 28 Days Later (2002); the remake of the Romero film Dawn of the Dead
(2004); the parodic Shaun of the Dead (2004); more recently the comedies Zombieland
(2009) and Warm Bodies (2013); and the fast zombie, apocalyptic horror film World
War Z (2013)have collectively reflected popular and mainstream interest in zombie
cinema. In fact, a growing cultural industry has emerged around zombies, and the pub-
lication of satirical zombie survival guides (e.g., Max Brookss [2003]) and mashup,
parody zombie novels (e.g., Pride and Prejudice and Zombies [2009]) have been recently
featured on the New York Times Bestsellers list. The popularity of zombies in mainstream
culture, and specifically in film, is reflective of their utility as symbolic and critical repre-
sentations of the societies from which they emerge and as metaphorical illustrations of
the cultures zeitgeist. This article seeks to situate the zombie film within sociological
analysis and examine how cinematic depictions of zombies illustrate sociological
dynamics related to identity, collective behavior, disease, contagion, and the privileges
of social inequities.
While the zombie film is typically examined as a social commentary on cultural con-
formity, political apathy, and mindless consumerism, an unwavering characteristic of the
zombie film is that it is centrally about the issues related to self, identity, and the sociology
of health and disease. This article is organized around four primary topics, each of which
examines central sociological concepts related to the sociological implications of narrative
devices used in zombie cinema, particularly those related to individual zombie possession
and pandemic disease; how zombie films express social anxieties about the social con-
struction of self in the context of disease, stigma, and threats of de-individualization; the
roles of power and privilege in the social epidemiology of disease; and, finally, the sociol-
ogy of infectious disease in the context of globalization and pandemics.
A statement about our approach is warranted here. Scholars have long looked to the
stories being told in the popular culture for the purpose of illustrating power relations
(Marx [1844] 1978; Gramsci 1992; Adorno and Horkeimer 2002), dominant fears
(Glassner 1999), and as a reflection of societys beliefs and values (Denzin 1991). Socio-
logical analyses of cultural oeuvres like cinema have traditionally taken either a
sociology of film or a sociology in film approach (Sutherland and Feltey 2013).
Both are useful for different reasons. Our analytic strategy embraces both approaches to
best allow us to examine how zombie cinema represents societal dynamics that reflect
cultural anxieties present in contemporary society. Specifically, zombie cinema is
uniquely suited for the task of revealing important, sociological aspects of society
because it highlights collective anxieties about social life in the contemporary world in
graphic fashion. Whether zombie films engage themes of the other, risks of nuclear
proliferation, or pandemic disease, their sociological relevance is in their ability to
depict principles of sociology in strikingly ruthless, sometimes humorous, and often
gory detail. Regardless of a sociology of film or sociology in film approach, it is our con-
tention that film broadly represents a useful tool for understanding complex societal
phenomena, particularly when it comes to emerging sociology subfields like sociology
of health and disease. Consequently, there is no better genre of film for this analysis
than the zombie genre. Zombie films highlight a number of acutely modern concerns in
an increasingly globalized and technologically driven world. The following analysis
explores these in greater detail.
We begin with a discussion of the role of zombie films in American culture. Much
has been written about the cultural significance of zombie cinema but comparatively lit-
tle attention has been directed to zombie films as sociological texts. First, we examine
the origins and history of zombie cinema. Next, we move to a discussion of the central
narrative devices around which zombie films are organized. In particular, we focus on
two narratives in zombie films: those that emphasize zombie possession and those that
focus on the sociological risks of zombie pandemics. From there we move into a discus-
sion of what the zombie films can tell us about society and how they illustrate sociologi-
cal principles. Here we develop an analysis of zombies as selves, and how zombie
films express cultural anxieties about selfhood, loss of autonomy, and threats of de-
individualization. We describe the social aspects of zombies, how they differ from living
humans, and what this distinction tells us about how zombie films represent collective
anxieties about the self in the context of disease. We then explore the roles of power and
privilege in the social epidemiology of zombification, paying particular attention to
how those who succumb to zombiedom illustrate the sociological dynamics of health
disparities in the real world. In particular, in a cinematic world threatened by zombie
contagion, we find that the most likely to be infected are those who have large numbers
of informal social connections (either through their occupations or living conditions);
lack the resources necessary to evade and/or treat infection; and lack the privilege to
physically separate themselves from potentially infected populations. Finally, the sociol-
ogy of infectious disease is reviewed to address how zombiedom correlates with real dis-
ease outbreaks, what we know about the social aspects of infectious disease
transmission, and the sociology of pandemics.
narrative structure of the films. The earliest zombie films were particularly expressive of
the dubious nature of the master/slave dichotomy. For example, the cultural anxieties
associated with imperialism, worker exploitation, and slavery are illustrated in White
Zombie, and also in other early zombie films like Jacques Turneurs I Walked with a Zom-
bie (1943) (Bishop 2010). As Bishop (2010:13) explains, by allowing native voodoo
priests to enslave white heroines, these inherently racist movies terrified Western viewers
with the thing they likely dreaded most at the time: slave uprisings and reverse colo-
nization. Others have argued that the zombie films produced in the 1950s and 1960s
personified Cold War anxieties and uncertainty over the changing racial order in the
United States as well as the tensions surrounding the Vietnam War (Dendle 2001; Bishop
2010, 2015; Vuckovic 2011; Wetmore 2011). Films of the 21st century continue the trend
of zombie cinema reflecting contemporary cultural anxieties. As Bishop (2015) argues,
recent films like Wasting Away (2007) and Warm Bodies (2013), emblematic of the cur-
rent zombie renaissance, are possible because of contemporary and collective fears
about terrorism and international pandemics (as well as fears about anthrax, bird flu,
mad cow disease), and cultural concerns over immigration and identity politics.
In looking at the history of zombie cinema, a crucial turning point was reached
when George A. Romero released the seminal Night of the Living Dead (1968). It is with
Night of the Living Dead that the first true and popular zombie film was born; it is also
one of the first films to usher in a new theme in zombie cinemathat of the survival
narrative in the midst of a zombie apocalypse. With it came the flesh-eating ghoul,
slow(ish) moving, pack traveling tropes, and mass zombie contagion, all of which have
become hallmarks of zombie cinema. Bishop argues that Night of the Living Dead is
both a critique of, and an expression of the racial tensions of the times. In one sense, as
the films only black character, Bens inclusion as the protagonist is symbolic. Bishop
(2010:119) argues however, that although Bens attempts are really only to resist the
white patriarchys othering of his autonomy and authority, they recall the threat of
the Other as depicted in the voodoo-zombie films. Simultaneously, however, in the
midst of the social upheavals of the Civil Rights Movement, Ben manifests the greatest
fear of many white Americans: that black men would become socially impertinent and
come to threaten the safety of white women (2010:120). Following Night of the Living
Dead, replacing (and even reversing) the racist and imperialist fears associated with the
voodoo master/slave dichotomy were new themes reflecting the societal and racial ten-
sions of the 1960s, and emerging critiques of racial discrimination in America (Maddrey
2004). Night of the Living Dead infused new vigor and vitality into the zombie genre,
irrevocably altering its form and function as well as establishing the zombie as a sym-
bolic representation of societal illsa pattern that continues in present-day cinema.1
When viewed as a whole and through the lens of time, we can see Romeros films as
emblematic of the larger social changes taking place in American society. This is espe-
cially true for the two remakes; Night of the Living Dead (1990) and Dawn of the Dead
(2004). When compared with the originals, we see stark contrasts in both films. In the
1990 version of Night of the Living Dead, we see gender politics assume a more promi-
nent role with the films lead female character, Barbara, taking on a more active role in
self-preservation unlike the passive, frightened victim needing protection, as she was
portrayed in the original version. The Dawn of the Dead remake notably rids itself of the
overt commentary on consumerism in the shopping mall setting, focusing instead on
the mall as a region of social control and ending not, with a hopeful prospect of escape,
but with everyones fate in jeopardy. In line with a more modern, mediated world, the
films final moments are recorded via video camera; thus, documenting the decline of
civilization and humanity (Wetmore 2011).
As the millennium approached, the genre took a dramatic (and sometimes comedic)
turn toward faster, stronger, and more ingenious zombies, beginning with the parodic,
punk rockinspired film Return of the Living Dead (1985). The emergence of the fast
zombie was solidified with the release of 28 Days Later (2002) where the speed, dexter-
ity, and strength of zombies were taken to new levels of dangerousness and ferocity, all
with the intensity of a full-throttled sprint. Considering most of the zombie films since
28 Days have continued to feature fast zombies (e.g., the remake of Dawn of the Dead
[2004], and the sequel to 28 Days Later, 28 Weeks Later, the Resident Evil series, Zombie-
land, World War Z), it might be that the fast zombie is here to stay (there are of course
notable exceptions to fast-moving zombies from Romero himself and 2004s Shaun of
the Dead). Symbolically of course, the move toward the fast-moving zombie mirrors
societys seemingly increasing approach toward a postmodern speed culture (Gott-
schalk 1999) and fast capitalism (Agger 1989, 2004), and reflects a new fear alto-
getherthat of rapid social change, particularly in an era of social media and rapid
information transmission. As we will explore below, these fast-moving zombies provide
some of the best analyses of the zombie as a contemporary, environmental pandemic.
that is at issue in the world of cinema. Instead, because zombies are both undead and
without selfhood, they are somehow radically nonhuman. Other undead creatures that
appear in film do not carry the same connotation. Vampires, for example, are undead
but also, and most notably, they retain selfhood and are depicted much more sympa-
thetically (George and Hughes 2013). As the popularly of the Twilight films attests, being
undead with selfhood makes vampires much more appealing than being a dehumanized
zombie, and is a state of being a human might actually find desirable.
As the zombie film genre has progressed beyond the focus on the possession narra-
tive, the cinematic theme of the loss of selfhood has begun to more directly reflect a pre-
occupation with the risks of the modern world. Fears of individual zombie possession
have been replaced by a focus on enormous hordes of nameless, faceless zombies chas-
ing, infecting, and transforming the living into a de-individualized, undead multitude.
Here, the zombie phenomenon has become massified, and threats of zombie infection
are vulnerabilities not only to individuals, but also to entire communities, nations, and
even civilizations. In the 21stcentury zombie film, these narratives have taken on more
apocalyptic overtones; the threat is not only the loss of individual self, but also the pos-
sibility of the extermination of cultural selfhood, and of the extinction of human self-
hood as a marker of the species.
In contemporary film narratives, zombie plagues have emerged as a consequence of
fallout from the uncertainties of modernity (Koven 2008), a result of what Beck (1992)
has called the risk society of the late-20th century. Such themes still retain a focus on
possession narratives, of becoming just another face in the zombie crowd; but these
themes are coupled with risk narratives that explore anxieties about the shortcomings of
modern technology. Whether it be from a radioactive probe (as in Night of the Living
Dead) or the release of a highly contagious socially engineered virus (as in Zombieland,
28 Days Later, and the Resident Evil films) the cause of the zombie pandemic is usually a
catastrophe of human origin. While selfhood remains imperiled in contemporary zom-
bie cinema, this threat has apocalyptic connotations and is a prominent, sociological
subtext that drives todays popular preoccupation with zombies.
While most zombie films do not show zombies as having any semblance of self,
they are social creatures, and through their mob-like organization develop a form of
social organization as a means of survival. The social nature of zombies is perhaps
the most common, and unspoken theme in zombie cinema. Zombies are almost
totally reliant on the mob as a form of social organization. Because zombies have lit-
tle sense of self, their survival essentially depends on collaborative group hunting,
matched with systems of communication that are prelinguistic and nonsymbolic.
Such communication systems are often characterized as spontaneous or
emotional communication (Buck and VanLear 2002), and facilitate the group con-
tagion that seems to motivate most zombie groups. These zombie congregations are
loosely defined, flow spontaneously through emotional contagion without much
definition, but their strength emerges as their numbers grow. Their collective power
and social organization is epitomized by what Le Bon (1897) describes as the impul-
sive, irrational and contagious crowd. Alone, a zombies slow, staccato shambling
renders it an easily dispatched threat for most protagonists. As a crowd, however,
the zombies are powerful, more easily able to overtake and (both literally and figura-
tively) consume their victims.
As they are depicted in film, zombies are metaphorically members of a great,
unwashed mass and are explicitly and almost exclusively social creatures. They are
driven by the basest of human desires: a purely id-like compulsion toward the con-
sumption of human flesh. While the motivation to bite, infect, and eat living humans
makes zombies appear antisocial, their mob-like behavior can actually be considered a
form of what Wilson (2012) describes as cooperative eusociality. While virtually all
zombie cinema since Night of the Living Dead has typically depicted zombies as relying
on the group hunt for the successful pursuit of humans, more recent films like World
War Z illustrate what might be called the eusocial zombie, with members of zombie
mobs engaging in impulsive, yet cooperative behavior to scale large barricades in order
to reach their human prey, much like army ants build living bridges to cross gaps in
the forest floor.
Because the hallmark of the zombie is that it is characterized by sociality with-
out individuality, matched with a concomitant suspension of personhood, the
social construction of the zombie is such that it is defined as a human that is
other than human. In zombie cinema, the infected quite literally experience what
Goffman (1961) describes as a mortification of self. This mortification is a pro-
cess not necessarily a product of the bureaucratic de-individualization described by
both Goffman and Weber (2009) but is, instead, a consequence of a biological
transformation paired with the social organization of the zombie mob. Such anxi-
eties about totalitarian absorption of the individual by the group have been long-
standing themes in classical sociological theory, reflected in Marxs ([1844] 1978)
analysis of alienation, Durkheims ([1893]1997) theory of mechanical solidarity,
and Simmels (1971) description of the blase attitude of denizens of the metropolis.
The social organization of the infected in zombie cinema reflects these same fears
Horvath who is convinced that they are nonhuman. Hershel believes that zombifica-
tion is only a temporary state and that the infected may one day be retransformed; as a
result, he has been warehousing friends and family members in a barn hoping they
may eventually be cured:
Hershel: I saw the broadcasts before they stopped, saw the irrational fear, the atrocities, like
the incident at my well.
Dale: We put down a walker.
Hershel: You killed a person.
Dale: Well, if you watched the same broadcasts I did, you saw walkers attack, kill. Theyre
dangerous.
Hershel: A paranoid schizophrenic is dangerous too. We dont shoot sick people.
Dale: With all due respect, you are cut off from the outside world here. But Ive seen
people that I cared about die and come back, and theyre not people.
Hershel: My wife and stepson are in that barn. Theyre people.
Dale: Im sorry. [38: 206]
Ultimately, Dale realizes that the only viable course of action is in fact to kill zombies,
conceding (and thus affirming the definition) that zombies only have bare life, are
not people, and represent an existential threat to humanity.
While in zombie cinema protagonists frequently debate the existential situation of
the infected, the aggression of zombies toward the living causes them to be encountered,
and usually defined, as ecological adversaries to humans. As such, killing the infected is
not only deemed acceptable in zombie films, it is necessary for the survival of human-
kind. Consequently, in some films (e.g., Dawn of the Dead and Zombieland), individual
zombies are sniped wantonly for sport. In other films (e.g., Day of the Dead and 28 Days
Later) they are warehoused for crass experimentation. With the issue of zombie selfhood
as a pivot-point, however, many protagonists are confronted with moral questions over
the human nature of the zombie. Is killing a zombie equivalent to killing a human?
How can one kill what is already dead? What are the implications of killing a human
that does not have a self?
The moral struggle over the personhood of the zombie is an important narrative
device in much of zombie cinema, and is a salient subtext of many such films. Because a
zombie is human in appearance, but exists without self, there are ambiguities as to
whether or not they should be considered full-fledged members of the human commu-
nity. If zombies are infected, but still living people, then the harm inflicted on them by
the uninfected is problematic. If, however, zombies are in fact dead, devoid of person-
hood, and aggressive, then humans are under no real social or moral imperative to help,
protect, or refrain from killing them. This predicament is a central theme underscoring
the drama of zombie cinema: Are zombies people with suspended selves deserving to be
saved; or are they undead ghouls to be feared and ultimately exterminated for the sur-
vival of the human species?
As a narrative focus, the moral quandary about zombies and their selfhood is
directly explored in many zombie films. As a consequence, individuals like Hershel
Green are often portrayed as unwilling to kill their infected friends and family members.
This is also illustrated in films like Dawn of the Dead and Shaun of the Dead. What if
Hershel Green is right and a residue of the human self remains? As examples of the
prevalence of this theme, zombie films like Fido, Shaun of the Dead, and Day of the Dead
all examine the potential existence of a vestigial self among zombies. In Day of the Dead,
Romero uses the setting of the shopping mall to create an allegory of mindless consum-
erism and give his protagonists the opportunity to debate the existential situation of the
zombie. During one famous scene, zombies lumber aimlessly past abandoned store-
fronts and pause to stare blankly at forsaken window displays. A group of humans
(including Francine and Stephen) who have taken refuge on the rooftop of the mall
comment on the paradoxical behavior of the zombies and reflect on their absence of
selfhood:
That the zombies appear to have some memory left of their living past raises the
question as to whether or not some semblance of selfhood remains. Similar
examinations of the selfhood of zombies are further explored in Land of the
Dead (2005), where some zombies continue to instinctually engage in their old
jobs, most notably Big Daddy who repeatedly pantomimes the pumping of
gasoline.
The clearest philosophical treatment of selfhood and the zombie comes, perhaps,
from Day of the Dead (1985). In this film, a scientist named Dr. Logan attempts to
socialize zombies through behaviorist systems of punishment and reward. Logan has
trained one zombie, whom he has named Bub, to engage in simple human behaviors
and to use basic language. His efforts are met with some success. In conversation with
his assistant Sarah, Logan remarks:
For Logan, while zombies may have lost their own sense of self, they may have
retained the capacity to learn, if properly taught using stimulus and response
conditioning.
In one memorable scene depicting Logans socialization experiments, he gives Bub a
telephone to play with:
As Land of the Dead informs us, while lacking a fully formed self, zombies are capa-
ble of behavioristic conditioning. To Dr. Logan it seems, this development could sig-
nal the need to reevaluate how we understand zombies; not as mindless cannibals
but something more akin to wild animals capable of at least some rudimentary
training.
In some films, such as the comedy Shaun of the Dead, the moral issue of zom-
bie selfhood is taken to an extreme. While saving Shaun and his girlfriend,
Shauns best friend Ed is overwhelmed by zombies and succumbs to the attack.
As the film closes, the viewer finds that Shaun has kept a zombified (and poten-
tially threatening) Ed alive in his backyard shed so they can continue to play
video games together. While Ed does not appear to have a sense of self, he is
regarded by Shaun as a person with a socially meaningful life. Of course, zombies
like Ed create ambiguities surrounding the sociological membership of the zombi-
fied in the world of humans, but highlight selfhood as an important theme in
zombie cinema. Even Ed remains a threat to the uninfected. The primary danger
of the zombie is that with their bite they threaten to steal away individual self-
hood, and reduce a human to their bare life, a de-individualized member of an
anonymous mass.
In Warm Bodies (a zombie cinema spin on Romeo and Juliet) the issue of the
zombie self is examined in a new way. Here, a unique set of zombies emerge, those that
do maintain vestiges of self, complete with an inner phenomenology that allows them
to imaginatively ruminate on their own experience. In the film, the protagonist, R, a
zombie, falls in love with a living person named Julia. The narrative unfolds through
the viewers access to Rs inner monologue. For instance, the story begins with an intro-
duction to Rs inner world:
R: [voice-over]: What am I doing with my life? Im so pale. I should get out more.
I should eat better. My posture is terrible. I should stand up straighter.
People would respect me more if I stood up straighter. Whats wrong with
me? I just want to connect. Why cant I connect with people? Oh, right,
its because Im dead. I shouldnt be so hard on myself. I mean, were all
dead. This girl is dead. That guy is dead. That guy in the corner is
definitely dead. Jesus these guys look awful.
Later in the film, we see more evidence of Rs conscious experience, ability to self-
reflect, and ultimately his ability to distinguish himself from other zombies:
R: [voice-over]: I wish I could introduce myself, but I dont remember my name anymore.
I mean, I think it started with an r but thats all I have left. I cant
remember my name, or my parents, or my job. . . although my hoodie
would suggest I was unemployed.
R: [voice-over]: This is my best friend. By best friend, I mean we occasionally grunt and stare
awkwardly at each other. We even have almost conversations sometimes.
Cooley demonstrates that someone needs an ability to recognize oneself as separate and
distinct from othersself-differentiationin order for a more complex self to emerge
(Cooley 1902). When R discusses M we can see that, in the realm of zombie cinema
at least some are capable of distinction from one individual to the next as well as beyond
the dichotomy of alive versus dead and shambling. Ultimately, it appears that a rudi-
mentary form of self might be possible among the undead. Such a revelation might not
only call for a reevaluation of the zombie in cinema as a mindless threat worthy of
immediate extermination to one that might need to be contained instead, but might
indicate a change in the society writ large. If it can be argued that previous zombie films
reflected the cultural zeitgeist; namely, a fear of individuals becoming consumed into a
mindless, faceless mass then perhaps the shift toward a new kind of zombie, one capable
of self-differentiation within a faceless mass, might reflect societys changing beliefs
about what it means to be a part of a larger aggregation of people (i.e., a crowd where
some semblance of individuality can remain).
In zombie films, the distinction between living and (un)dead, individual and crowd
takes on real significance. For those unable to escape their stigmatized identities and for
the uninfected, individuals go to great lengths to either isolate themselves from the dis-
eased (as in Dawn of the Dead), or malign zombies as subhuman through embarrass-
ment, ridicule, and physical attack (as in Zombieland). As stigmatized and maligned
individuals, zombies are caught within a social construction process that ascribes to
them an unalterable master status that parallels, in many ways, that experienced by indi-
viduals with disease or disability. And while zombies are distinct among the stigmatized
in the overt threats they pose to the uninfected, they also exemplify the culture of fear
(generally unfounded) that emerges around the issue of disease and its epidemiology
(Glassner 1999).
Ultimately, the way in which characters in zombie films delineate who is, and who is
not a zombie and which actions are appropriate to take against each is a complex pro-
cess of sociological import. The aforementioned examples of zombie interaction, differ-
entiation between the living and the dead, and zombies as a special in-between category
demonstrate this struggle throughout zombie cinema. The social organization of the
formerly living also presents a fascinating opportunity to examine what it is about
humans that makes us social beings as well. Perhaps equally interesting is who becomes a
zombie (or avoids this fate worse than death) in the first place. As in real life and reel
life, the answer mirrors social divisions prominent throughout society and social
epidemiology.
The 21stcentury zombie film certainly represents a hyperbolic treatment of issues
related to contemporary health and disease. However, it does provide a unique opportu-
nity to examine a broad range of concernsboth micro and macrorelated to the soci-
ology of self, stigma, health, health care, and disease.
Social Density
Zombies, like the carriers of many infectious diseases, are generally encountered in large
numbers in densely populated, urban areas. Here, Durkheims ([1893]1997) analysis of
Narrator: At the beginning of the 21st century, the Umbrella Corporation had become the
largest commercial entity in the United States. Nine out of every ten homes
contain its products. Its political and financial influence is felt everywhere. In
public, it is the worlds leading supplier of computer technology, medical
products, and healthcare. Unknown, even to its own employees, its massive
profits are generated by military technology, genetic experimentation, and
viral weaponry.
When the genetic experimentation of the Umbrella Corporation goes awry, the breadth
of its social influence allows nearly the entire global population to succumb to zombie
infection.
Social Isolation
In zombie cinema, during an outbreak, those who initially remain uninfected and who
survive the longest, tend to live in remote locations or in relative social isolation. Such
individuals are free from the daily contact with others that has been demonstrated to be
an important factor in the spread of infectious disease (Eubank et al. 2004; Mossong
et al. 2008). In fact, survivors in zombie films are generally well aware of the importance
of social isolation as a protective factor in avoiding zombie infection. Many go to great
lengths to travel to remote areas. For example, Alice and her companions in Resident
Evil: Extinction journey to the Nevada desert, and Jim, Selena, and Hannah from 28
Days Later ultimately flee the city to find refuge in a secluded rural cottage where they
wait out the starvation of the zombies in anticipation of rescue by other survivors of the
infection.
Social Networks
In zombie films, survivors almost always inhabit or create supportive and protective social
networks to help them stay alive, secure resources, and fend off would-be attackers (both
among the dead and living). In fact, in zombie cinema it is extremely rare to find a lone
individual who successfully survives without social support; most survivors of a zombie
apocalypse have to collaborate. Mark, in 28 Days Later, expresses this directly in his con-
versation with the newly awakened Jim: Rules of survival. Lesson one - you never go any-
where alone, unless youve got no choice. The importance of collaboration is similarly
and most simply illustrated by Columbuss 29th Rule of Zombieland, The Buddy Sys-
tem, which recommends that during the zombie apocalypse it is crucial to find some-
one on whom you can rely. The importance of cooperative networks in increasing the
odds of survival is a point made explicitly throughout zombie cinema, and humorously
so in one scene from Shaun of the Dead. Here, as Shaun and his friends hide out in a
local pub preparing to rally themselves into action, he prepares his friends to use an
ornamental shotgun to clear an escape path through the zombies outside:
Shaun: Twenty-nine shells. So we should work together on this. I need someone to help
me reload and everyone else to keep look out. Ill fire.
As Bertrand Russell once said, The only thing that will redeem mankind is
cooperation. I think we can all appreciate the relevance of that now.
Liz: Was that on a beer mat?
Shaun: Yeah, it was Guinness Extra Cold.
Liz: I wont say anything.
Shaun: Thanks.
The salience of social networks is a protective factor, the centrality of which has been
demonstrated in many studies of infectious disease (House, Landis, and Umberson
1988). In short, social networks have been found to mediate the onset, severity, and pro-
gression of disease (Cohen 1988). However, it is not simply ones network embedded-
ness that it is important in disease prevention, it also is the extensity and intensity of
supportive social networks (Berkman et al. 2000).
Zombie films provide many examples of the significance of social networks in sur-
viving the breakout of a zombie virus. For example, the original Night of the Living
Dead establishes the thematic motif of the survival narrative, where a loosely connected
group of survivors converge and seek refuge in an abandoned home. Without mutual
support and cooperation, individual survival would certainly have been abbreviated,
particularly for a character in the film like Barbara, whose survival skills are minimal
and who is essentially reduced to hysterical panic. Other notable examples can be found
throughout zombie cinema. In Zombieland, Columbus eventually becomes buddies
with Tallahassee, and later with Wichita and Little Rock, and despite several instances of
mistrust they ultimately find their chances for survival are significantly increased by
mutual support. Central to both incarnations of Dawn of the Dead, teamwork among
survivors becomes crucial as they divide up tasks and collaborate to kill the zombies
lurking around the shopping mall. Finally, throughout the Resident Evil series, groups of
survivors cluster around the central protagonist, Alice, as they explore various strategies
to undermine the Umbrella Corporation and keep the T-virus at bay; as the series pro-
gresses, Alice even collaborates with clones of herself. As a survival mechanism, the
Given the context of a zombie pandemic, the pessimism toward government expressed
by Jims companions is not unexpected. Their families are dead, they are disconnected
from any sense of larger social community, and they have few promising prospects for
survival. Their nihilism is symbolic of the lack of public trust that exists for public insti-
tutions (Putnam 1995; Newton and Norris 2000), a growing theme in contemporary
zombie cinema.
What do zombie films tell us about the role of social institutionslike government
and corporate medicinein the prevention of disease? They metaphorically exemplify
the growing tendency in the United States for healthcare to be out of reach for consum-
ers. With changes in government health care expenditures, matched with growing
privatization of the health care industry, fewer individuals have access to healthcare
(although Obamacare has helped to reverse this trend). In zombie films, potential
treatments for infectious disease rest in the hands of military, political, and corporate
elites.
countless infected people seek treatment. We hear news reports throughout Night of
the Living Dead indicating mass murders occurring and about instances of the dead
not staying dead and beginning to attack the living. Dawn of the Dead begins with a
newscast detailing some of the initial reports and how to dispatch zombies.
Do not venture outside for any reason until the nature of this crisis has been
determined, and until we can advise what course of action to take. Keep listen-
ing to radio and TV for special instructions as this crisis develops further. Thou-
sands of office and factory workers are being urged to stay at their places of
employment, not to make any attempt to get to their homes. However, in spite
of this urging and warning, streets and highways are packed with frantic people
trying to reach their families or, apparently, to flee just anywhere. We repeat,
the safest course of action at this time is simply to stay where you are.
Despite this advice, the streets are packed as people attempt to flee. Much of
the carnage results when the uninfected, in a panicked and frenzied state, attempt
to flee the infected thereby exacerbating the threat of the zombies themselves. In
World War Z, as the films protagonist attempts to drive down a busy street with
his family, pandemonium breaks loose as heavily congested streets clog up escape
routes and zombies begin to attack. The stores experience a rush and food and
water quickly disappear. In one scene within the store, people fight over and shoot
each other for the last remaining necessities. In other ways also it is the living that
constantly threaten and steal from the films band of survivors. For instance, in
Diary of the Dead, after numerous foibles the gang encounters some rogue National
Guard soldiers who rob them of their valuables, possibly condemning them to
death by zombie. In virtually every zombie movie we see fear grip people, causing
infighting and suspicion and preventing vital cooperation. In the nascent stages of
a zombie outbreak the zombies have not grown too numerous and have yet to
begin pack feeding. This initial stage does not last long as the number of zombies
grows rapidly and the undead soon begin to outnumber the living. In this manner,
zombie cinema depicts the spread of the disease in much the same pattern as any
other highly infectious disease (e.g., SARS, Ebola, influenza, etc.). In fact, this point
is made explicitly in most zombie films. It does not take long before societys infra-
structure begins to erode and lawlessness and anomie take root.
CONCLUSION
The zombie films prominence in American cinema continues into the present and likely
will for some time to come. As it evolves, these films will continue to provide rich texts
for sociological analysis. As a genre, zombie cinema presents more than a source of
entertainment; it also expresses cultural anxieties about the contemporary social world.
We have suggested that the zombie film is an important source of cultural critique, and
provides a rich, sociological expression of the dynamics of identity and disease, conta-
gion and pandemic, and the privileges that circumscribe health and social inequality.
As a text for sociological analysis, the zombie film highlights key sociological princi-
ples regarding the insight zombie narratives can provide us about ourselves and our
social world. We have suggested that zombie cinema provides a window into anxieties
about the social nature of human beings, examining our collective angst regarding self-
hood, disease, and stigma. Ultimately, zombie films compel us to make ethical inquiries
into what counts as human, and how the prejudices that often accompany disease
(and disability) express collective and existential fears about selfhood, loss of autonomy,
and mortality.
Fears about self and mortality are often framed by the sociological dynamics of
power and privilege, dynamics that are often central to zombie films. The social epide-
miology of zombification is reflective of the inequalities endemic to the stratified access
to healthcare in the contemporary world. In zombie films, not everyone succumbs to
zombiedom, and survivors embody the privileges that come from social power and
prestige. In our contemporary social world, much like in the cinematic world threatened
by zombie contagion, those most likely to be infected by contagious disease are those
whose life circumstances imbed them in the midst of the ongoing, and informal flow of
social life (e.g., those in the service sector), who lack the resources necessary to evade
and/or treat infection, and do not have the privileges necessary to physically and socially
separate themselves from potential carriers of disease.
On the most macro-level, zombie cinema expresses key principles of the sociology
of infectious disease in the context of globalization. Fears of the zombie apocalypse
NOTE
1
Romeros Night of the Living Dead and its sequels became the vanguard of an approach to the
zombie film as social commentary, a pattern he has continued throughout his career, tackling
issues like: rampant consumerism (1978s Dawn of the Dead); the misguided use of science and
military force (1985s Day of the Dead); economic greed and perverse inequality (2005s Land of
the Dead); the fallacies of contemporary war and media saturation (2007s Diary of the Dead);
and the need for collaborative effort to ameliorate social ills (2009s Survival of the Dead).
REFERENCES
Adorno, Theodor and Max Horkheimer. 2002. Dialectic of Enlightenment. Palo Alto, CA: Stanford
University Press.
Agger, Ben. 1989. Fast Capitalism: A Critical Theory of Significance. Chicago: University of Illinois
Press.
. 2004. Speeding Up Fast Capitalism: Internet Culture, Work, Families, Food, Bodies. St Paul,
MN: Paradigm.
Barrett, Ronald, Christopher W. Kuzawa, Thomas McDade, and George J. Armelagos. 1998.
Emerging and Re-emerging Infectious Diseases: The Third Epidemiologic Transition.
Annual Review of Anthropology 27:24771.
Beck, Ulrich. 1992. Risk Society: Towards a New Modernity. Vol. 17. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Berkman, Lisa F., Thomas Glass, Ian Brissette, and Teresa Seeman. 2000. From Social Integration
to Health: Durkheim in the New Millennium. Social Science & Medicine 51(6):84357.
Bishop, Kyle William. 2010. American Zombie Gothic. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
. 2015. How Zombies Conquered Popular Culture: The Multifarious Walking Dead in the 21st
Century. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Brooks, Max. 2003. The Zombie Survival Guide: Complete Protection from the Living Dead. New
York: Three Rivers Press.
Buck, Ross and C. Arthur VanLear. 2002. Verbal and Nonverbal Communication: Distinguishing
Symbolic, Spontaneous, and Pseudo-spontaneous Nonverbal Behavior. Journal of Communi-
cation 52(3):52241.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2013. Health Disparities and Inequalities Report.
Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control. Retrieved January 17, 2016 (http://www.cdc.gov/
DisparitiesAnalytics/).
Cohen, Sheldon. 1988. Psychosocial Models of the Role of Social Support in the Etiology of
Physical Disease. Health Psychology 7(3):26997.
Cooley, Charles Horton. 1902. Human Nature and the Social Order. New York: Charles Scribners
Sons.
Dendle, Peter. 2001. The Zombie Movie Encyclopedia. Jefferson, NC: MacFarland.
. 2007. The Zombie as Barometer of Cultural Anxiety. Pp. 4557 in Monsters and the
Monstrous: Myths and Metaphors of Enduring Evil, Vol. 38, edited by N. Scott. New York:
Rudopi.
Denzin, Norman. 1991. Images of Postmodern Society: Social Theory and Contemporary Cinema.
London: Sage.
Domhoff, G. William. 2006. Who Rules America?: Power and Politics, and Social Change. New
York: McGraw-Hill.
Dubos, Rene. 1959. Mirage of Health: Utopias, Progress & Biological Change. New Brunswick, NJ:
Rutgers University Press.
Durkheim, Emile. [1893]1997. The Division of Labor in Society. Introduction by Lewis Coser,
translation by W. D. Halls. New York: Free Press.
Eubank, Stephen, Hasan Guclu, V. S. Anil Kumar, Madhav V. Marathe, Aravind Srinivasan,
Zoltan Toroczkai, and Nan Wang. 2004. Modelling Disease Outbreaks in Realistic Urban
Social Networks. Nature 429(6988):18084.
Farmer, Paul. 1996. Social Inequalities and Emerging Infectious Diseases. Emerging Infectious
Diseases 2(4):25969.
. 1999. Infections and Inequalities: The Modern Plagues. Berkeley: University of California
Press.
George, Sam and Bill Hughes. 2013. Introduction: Undead Reflections: The Sympathetic Vam-
pire and Its Monstrous Other. Gothic Studies 15(1):17.
Glassner, Barry. 1999. The Culture of Fear: Why Americans Are Afraid of the Wrong Things. New
York: Basic Books.
Goffman, Erving. 1961. Asylums: Essays on the Social Situation of Mental Patients and Other
Inmates. New York: Anchor Books.
. 1963. Stigma: Notes on the Management of Spoiled Identity. New York: Simon & Schuster.
Gottschalk, Simon. 1999. Speed Culture: Fast Strategies in Televised Commercial Ads. Qualita-
tive Sociology 22(4):31129.
Gramsci, Antonio. 1992. Prison Notebooks. New York: Columbia University Press.
Granovetter, Mark S. 1973. The Strength of Weak Ties. American Journal of Sociology 78(6):136080.
Gunn, Joshua and Shaun Treat. 2005. Zombie Trouble: A Propaedeutic on Ideological Subjectifi-
cation and the Unconscious. Quarterly Journal of Speech 91(2):14474.
Heymann, David L. 2005. Social, Behavioural and Environmental Factors and Their Impact on
Infectious Disease Outbreaks. Journal of Public Health Policy 26(1):13339.
House, James S., Karl R. Landis, and Debra Umberson. 1988. Social Relationships and Health.
Science 241(4865):54045.
Koven, Mikel, J. 2008. The Folklore of the Zombie Film. Pp. 1934 in Zombie Culture: Autopsies
of the Living Dead, edited by S. McIntosh and M. Leverette. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
Le Bon, Gustave. 1897. The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind. Southampton, England:
Fischer.
Leverette, Marc. 2008. The Funk of Forty Thousand Years; or, How the (Un) Dead Get Their
Groove On. Pp. 185212 in Zombie Culture: Autopsies of the Living Dead, edited by S. McIn-
tosh and M. Leverette. Lanham, MD: Scarecrow.
Link, Bruce G. and Jo Phelan. 1995. Social Conditions as Fundamental Causes of Disease. Jour-
nal of Health and Social Behavior 35:8094.
Maddrey, Joseph. 2004. Nightmares in Red, White and Blue: The Evolution of the American Horror
Film. Jefferson, NC: McFarland.
Marx, Karl. [1844]1978. Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844. Pp. 66125 in The
Marx-Engels Reader, edited by Robert C. Tucker. New York: Norton.
McCarthy, John D. and Mayer N. Zald. 1977. Resource Mobilization and Social Movements: A
Partial Theory. American Journal of Sociology 82(6):121241.
Mead, George Herbert. 1934. Mind, Self and Society. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Mossong, Joel, N. Hens, M. Jit, P. Beutels, K. Auranen, R. Mikolajczyk, M. Massari, S. Salmaso, G.
S. Tomba, J. Wallinga, J. Heijne, M. Sadkowska-Todys, M. Rosinska, and W. J. Edmunds.
2008. Social Contacts and Mixing Patterns Relevant to the Spread of Infectious Diseases.
PLoS Med 5(3):e74.
Newton, Ken and Pippa Norris. 2000. Confidence in Public Institutions: Faith, Culture, or Per-
formance? Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Political Science Associa-
tion, September 15, 1999, Atlanta, GA. Retrieved March 1, 2016 (http://citesource.trincoll.
edu/asa/asaconfpaper_002.pdf).
Parsons, Talcott. 1951. The Social System. Glencoe, IL: The Free Press.
Putnam, Robert. D. 1995. Bowling Alone: Americas Declining Social Capital. Journal of Democ-
racy 6(1):6578.
Simmel, Georg. 1971. The Metropolis and Mental Life. Pp. 32429 in Georg Simmel: On Indi-
viduality and Social Forms, edited by Donald Levine. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Sutherland, Jeanne-Anne and Kathryn M. Feltey. 2013. Cinematic Sociology: Social Life in Film. 2d
ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Travis, Mitchell. 2014. Were All Infected: Legal Personhood, Bare Life and The Walking Dead.
International Journal for the Semiotics of Law (Revue Internationale de Se miotique Juridique)
28(4):787800.
Vuckovic, Jovanka. 2011. Zombies!: An Illustrated History of the Undead. New York: St. Martins
Griffin.
Weber, Max. 2009. From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology. London, England: Routledge.
Weiss, Robin A. and Anthony J. McMichael. 2004. Social and Environmental Risk Factors in the
Emergence of Infectious Diseases. Nature Medicine 10:S70S76.
Wetmore, Kevin J., Jr. 2011. Back From the Dead: Remakes of Romero Zombie Films as Markers of
Their Times. Jefferson, NC: McFarland and Company.
Wilson, Edward O. 2012. The Social Conquest of Earth. New York: Liveright.